Where is the Unearthed Arcana SRD?

[Cergorach]

And, while you're at it, read the PI again. As it is, you've already violated the license. How are people going to be able to trust you to separated OGC material from a crippled declaration when you can't even get a clear OGC declaration correct?

Huh? Did i miss anything?

this is the PI designation, the Open Content designation, plus the trademark designation:

Product Identity: The following items are hereby identified as Product Identity, as defined in the Open Gaming License version 1.0a, Section l(e), and arc not Open Content: All trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters, deities, artifacts, places, etc), artwork, trade dress, and the names and game statistics for the following monsters-beholder, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti.

Open Content Except for material designated as Product Identity (see above) and the githyanki/githzerai, slaad, and yuan-ti bloodlines in Chapter 1, the contents of this WIZARDS game product are Open-Game Content, as defined in the Open Gaming License version 1.0a Section 1(d). No portion of this work other than the material designated as Open Game Content may be reproduced in any form without written permission. To learn more about the Open Gaming License and the d20 System License, please visit www.wizards.com/d20.

DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, DUNGEON MastEr, d20, d20 Modern, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, Monster Manual, Unearthed Arcana, and their respective logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., in the U.S.A. and other countries. Distributed to the hobby, toy, and comic trade in the United States and Canada by regional distributors. Distributed in the United States to the book trade by Holtzbrinck Publishing. Distributed in Canada to the book trade by Fenn Ltd. Distributed worldwide by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., and regional distributors. This material is protected under the copyright laws of the United Stares of America. Any reproduction or unauthorized use of the material or artwork contained herein is prohibited without the express written permission of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. This product is a work of fiction. Any similarity to actual people, organizations, places, or events is purely coincidental. Printed in the U.S.A. (c)2004 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

My notes for chapter four:

All trademarks:
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS [replaced by "20-Sided Fantasy"]
D&D [replaced by "20xF" or "20S"]
DUNGEON MastEr [replaced by "DM"]
d20 rules [replaced by "20-Sided Fantasy"]
d20 Modern [replaced by "20-Sided Modern"]
d20 System [replaced by "20-Sided System"]
Wizards of the Coast
Player's Handbook [replaced by "PHB"]
Dungeon Master's Guide [replaced by "DMG"]
Monster Manual [replaced by "MM"]
Unearthed Arcana [replaced by "UA"]

registered trademarks
proper names (characters, deities, artifacts, places, etc)
Tordek [replaced with Thordek]
Lidda [replaced with Liddea]

names and game statistics for the following monsters:
beholder [removed all reference]
displacer beast [removed all reference]
gauth [removed all reference]
githyanki [removed all reference]
githzerai [removed all reference]
mind flayer [removed all reference]
slaad [removed all reference]
umber hulk [removed all reference]
yuan-ti [removed all reference]

Did i miss something in the PI designation? If so, what?

 

[philreed]

Huh? Did i miss anything?

this is the PI designation, the Open Content designation, plus the trademark designation:

My notes for chapter four:

Did i miss something in the PI designation? If so, what?

Yes. "All trademarks, registered trademarks . . . " It doesn't specify "trademarks or registered trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast." All.

Your posted file violates that and in a way that would have me yanking it down ASAP before the lawyers swing in.

 

[Cergorach]

Yes. "All trademarks, registered trademarks . . . " It doesn't specify "trademarks or registered trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast." All. Your posted file violates that and in a way that would have me yanking it down ASAP before the lawyers swing in.

Where does it violate that?

[edit]
Ack! Crap! That's just sloppy on my part! I checked my scribbled notes (done while manually checking the OCR), stupid that i didn't include it with my other notes. Thanks Phil!
It's down and it's being corrected.
[/edit]

 

[philreed]

Where does it violate that?

Okay, I mentioned the place on the previous page. Let me stop trying to teach you and be blunt.

STAR WARS should not be mentioned in your PDF but it is. That type of violation would scare the hell out of me.

Read the Unearthed Arcana closely and you'll find multiple trademarks mentioned throughout the text.

EDIT: More points. The appearance of your PDF is dangerously close to the look of Unearthed Arcana. You share common typographic elements and should change that immediately.

Also, you mention something about adding diagrams. The diagrams in UA are closed content so you cannot copy them. This means reexecuting them. If you cannot determine from the text alone what a diagram would look like you should not include a diagram.

You're making a lot of fairly common mistakes and exhibiting a failure to completely comprehend the OGL. I recommend finding a lawyer to help you better understand the license before attempting anything. Especially dealing with "crippled" OGC declarations. The UA declaration of PI and OGC is very, very clear and you've demonstrated that you do not understand it.

 

[Cergorach]

Okay, I mentioned the place on the previous page. Let me stop trying to teach you and be blunt.

Blunt is good, makes you better understandable.

STAR WARS should not be mentioned in your PDF but it is. That type of violation would scare the hell out of me.

Thanks, for pointing that out, it shouldn't be in there, i somehow missed that. Mistake corrected.

Read the Unearthed Arcana closely and you'll find multiple trademarks mentioned throughout the text.

I know that i've made notes on that, this one slipped through, stupidity is no excuse.

EDIT: More points. The appearance of your PDF is dangerously close to the look of Unearthed Arcana. You share common typographic elements and should change that immediately.

Trade dress you mean, my layout is different enough from the default D&D layout so to be not construed as copying trade dress. It has a few similarities, but also enough dissimilarities to be not mistaken for being of WotC production.

Also, you mention something about adding diagrams. The diagrams in UA are closed content so you cannot copy them. This means reexecuting them. If you cannot determine from the text alone what a diagram would look like you should not include a diagram.

Yup, that's why some things have taken longer then they should, there might be diferences, there might not be. Not having a photographic memory helps ;-)

You're making a lot of fairly common mistakes and exhibiting a failure to completely comprehend the OGL. I recommend finding a lawyer to help you better understand the license before attempting anything. Especially dealing with "crippled" OGC declarations. The UA declaration of PI and OGC is very, very clear and you've demonstrated that you do not understand it.

What haven't i understood, beyond the SW mistake? Please be blunt.

 

[Poster Bard]

The UA declaration of PI and OGC is very, very clear and you've demonstrated that you do not understand it.

Although it is clearly understood by top quality designers, such as Charles Rice of RPG Objects, who has also discovered the "excellent" utility of theSRD 3.5 Revised Bundle from Creative Mountain Games! He has rated it at 5 of 5 and has some very nice comments to make here, not to mention it being tied for #4 in the top twenty all time of PDF products in the EN World reviews section.

Clearly usage of the license will never be a problem for the fine folks who produce the best damned SRD product ever produced, provided all good people support top notch companies like Creative Mountain Games!

That's Creative Mountain Games! They do the work, so you can play!

[/jack]

 

[philreed]

Clearly usage of the license will never be a problem for the fine folks who produce the best damned SRD product ever produced, provided all good people support top notch companies like Creative Mountain Games!

That's Creative Mountain Games! They do the work, so you can play!

You're shameless. Don't stop.

 

[philreed]

Trade dress you mean, my layout is different enough from the default D&D layout so to be not construed as copying trade dress. It has a few similarities, but also enough dissimilarities to be not mistaken for being of WotC production.

Not true. You're typographic design is far too similar to WotC's. It has no value to such a compilation and does nothing more than to attempt to mimic WotC's trade dress as closely as possible. For that matter, an RTF would be far more useful as a resource than a PDF would. Everything you're attempting screams "love me." You're after nothing more than compliments from fans.

What haven't i understood, beyond the SW mistake? Please be blunt.

Your refusal to accept the fact that you should not use the names of creators. Your insistence on copying elements of WotC's trade dress. Your stated claim that this is a "reference" and then posting a PDF instead of a file that would be useful to authors.

And you know what? All I did when I looked at your file was skip directly to the section that I knew Star Wars was mentioned. If you'd properly rewritten that section I would have looked closely at the rest. But with just that one section you demonstrated that you do not understand the license.

 

[Cergorach]

Although it is clearly understood by top quality designers, such as Charles Rice of RPG Objects, who has also discovered the "excellent" utility of theSRD 3.5 Revised Bundle from Creative Mountain Games! He has rated it at 5 of 5 and has some very nice comments to make here, not to mention it being tied for #4 in the top twenty all time of PDF products in the EN World reviews section.

Clearly usage of the license will never be a problem for the fine folks who produce the best damned SRD product ever produced, provided all good people support top notch companies like Creative Mountain Games!

That's Creative Mountain Games! They do the work, so you can play!

[/jack]

So when is CMG going to be publishing their version of UA? The easiest way to get an rtf version of the pdf i posted is saving it as a rtf document in Adobe Acrobat Pro. If you want to try and make a buck from my free work, go ahead, make some money... ;-)

*looks at phil* see how easy that is... ;-)

 

[Cergorach]

Not true. You're typographic design is far too similar to WotC's. It has no value to such a compilation and does nothing more than to attempt to mimic WotC's trade dress as closely as possible. For that matter, an RTF would be far more useful as a resource than a PDF would. Everything you're attempting screams "love me." You're after nothing more than compliments from fans.

In the first place this document is intended for my use. My mind might be quick, but it's a mess when trying to retrieve information that i don't intuitively use (read: i'm great at forgetting specific rules).
I find that reading and printing documents in a nice pdf format works better for me then in rtf format. I like doing layout. "love me"? *grins* If i wnated that i would have become a rock star...

Your refusal to accept the fact that you should not use the names of creators. Your insistence on copying elements of WotC's trade dress. Your stated claim that this is a "reference" and then posting a PDF instead of a file that would be useful to authors.

Did i say that this file would be only usefull to authors, i said that it would also be usefull for authors. btw. I removed the author names, not because i think that they are proper names or are trademarks, mind you.

And you know what? All I did when I looked at your file was skip directly to the section that I knew Star Wars was mentioned. If you'd properly rewritten that section I would have looked closely at the rest. But with just that one section you demonstrated that you do not understand the license.

I do understand that the mention of SW shouldn't have been in the pdf, i missed it while removong PI, so sue me (kidding ;-)
Redownload and see if you like this any better...